Denied Retz and Scoobert Doobert joint ban appeal

Steam Username: Retz and Scoobert Doobert

Length of Ban: Both 2 weeks

Staff Member that Banned You: Noire

Ban Reason: 'trolling, civil unrest, disturbing' and some other made up reasons

Why You Should Be Unbanned:
So according to your mod Noire (http://steamcommunity.com/id/MuffinKing222), when someone has a different opinion then you do, and tries to argue their point with you, it's considered 'trolling, civil unrest, disturbing and discrimination'.

The story goes like this, my friend and I, Scoobert Doobert, were on the server and in the mood to watch documentaries and conspiracy theory videos, so we started off by watching a Columbine documentary (keep in mind, Scoobert and I are the only ones in the theater). 10 minutes or so into the documentary, Noire comes along and skips the video. We both ask him why he skipped the video, as the '!rules' don't say that videos of that kind aren't allowed. He just gives us some bullshit like "videos with security camera footage aren't allowed", so I ask him again where it says in the rules where it says that, and he doesn't reply.
I then ask Noire to get one of his higher ups to come on the server, because I felt that he was being extremely unfair, and he doesn't.

So me and my mate move on from Columbine and put on Sandy Hook instead, but according to Noire, Sandy Hook is allowed but Columbine isn't, which makes no fucking sense.
We watch the whole Sandy Hook documentary, which was 1 and a half hours long, keeping to ourselves and chatting between each other about stories and conspiracy theories, just having a good time.
This is when Noire barges in again and kicks Scoobert because he queued a Columbine video again.

At this point we start to argue with Noire again, we're having a normal argument, asking why we can't watch the video and stating that watching the video wasn't against the rules. At this point, Noire realizes that he's losing the arguement, so he thinks of a solution quickly. He bans Scoobert for 'trolling, civil unrest, disturbing' and some other bullshit. Now if you saw what we were saying (and please, look at the chat logs if possible), you would see that Scoobert clearly wasn't trolling, and that this was a false ban.

After Scoobert was banned, I argued with Noire telling him that he just falsely banned Scoobert, and after awhile, he bans me as well for the same reasons, even though I wasn't doing any of the things he mentioned either.

If you have seen Scoobert or myself on the server before, then you would know that we're both kind lads that just like to sit around, listen to some music, and have a chat. We're NOT trolls, and definitely weren't trying to cause any civil unrest (which is a stupid fucking ban reason by the way, because Scoobert and I were the only ones in that cinema, so we weren't bothering anyone else by playing those videos, therefore we weren't causing any civil unrest).

This is the video in question:
,
we ended up watching it on another cinema server after being banned, and it wasn't graphic at all, so that alone shows that it was a false ban.
It would be appreciated if someone higher up, and with more experience then Noire could do something about this.

Scoobert: http://steamcommunity.com/id/Nonfictions/
Myself: http://steamcommunity.com/id/RekItRetz/



Cheers

 

Alright I'm going to start by saying Scoobert's is automatically denied as you are not allowed to appeal for someone else, and his reasons were Trolling, Civil Unrest, and Disturbing.

Yours were for Civil Unrest, Trolling, and Discrimination.
Here are your videos queued: http://www.yukitheater.org/theater/videoinfo.php?id=1620031 - Discrimination
http://www.yukitheater.org/theater/videoinfo.php?id=1621503, http://www.yukitheater.org/theater/videoinfo.php?id=1621509, http://www.yukitheater.org/theater/videoinfo.php?id=1621510 - Civil Unrest
You also called another player a "faggot", and were most certainly not polite during your arguments which were in global, and continued queueing similar videos soon after I warned you which lead to the trolling mark.

I'd like to start by saying I was enforcing server rules and there was no "your opinion is different and you can argue better so I should ban to silence you", in fact we had a long discussion in staff chat about the specifics of it all, and it was decided that those videos were rightly blocked as they have been in the past as well. Seeing as this appeal is very disrespectful, poorly put together, is more focused on calling me out rather than explaining why you should be unbanned or reduced, and also you spent I would guess the better part of the morning trying to get around the ban with alternate accounts I'm going to deny it. Your friend may make his own if he wishes.

/denied
/locked